A suggestion to the editors of the eastasiaforum

Ii is very disappointing to see that while there are so many Chinese scholars and scholars who are involved in Chinese/China studies (whether it is economics, politics, cultural, historical or whatever), working in Australian tertiary institutions and particularly at the Australian National University (ANU), there are very few who are actively involved in the eastasiaforum. I don't know whether they are not interested in this at all, because of the forum's rating or something else?

I am sure it is worthwhile to be involved to contribute to the building up of public goods for the benefit of the public. Some of them surely should have known better the facts or better knowledges regarding China, such as the war reparations were received and compensations for comfort women as Cathy Yang claimed, , due to the nature of their professional work.

I would suggest the editors of eastasiaforum should reflect on that and identify the key reasons as to why, and encourage those to be actively involved in the forum.

PS: When I compare the eastasiaforum and the conversation, it seems the former is quite slow to have comments appear with the article, as opposed to the latter. The latter has the default for any comments to appear after they were provided and take out those they deem not to meet the standards for one reason or another. The former, however, has the default that does not allow any comments to appear automatically and only allow they to appear after some time. There is a clear difference between the two.

The editors should improve their work in this regard. They should not delay the appearance of comments due to their slowness.